CUE NEWSLETTER NO. 7
Fall 1997
After the Election . . .CUE LOOKS AHEAD
Eighteen thousand UC clericals workers will have a chance to vote in a union election this fall -- thanks to the hard work of CUE members and supporters on every campus, who collected signatures from over 8,000 of their co-workers, calling for the election.
The upcoming election is a "recertification" election, in which one union seeks to replace another. The ballot will contain 3 choices: AFSCME, CUE and "No Representation." By agreement between CUE, AFSCME, UC, and the State of California's Public Employment Relations Board (PERB), secret ballots for the election will be mailed to home addresses on October 6, and will be due back to the PERB by November 3. Only ballots that are returned to the PERB will determine the outcome of the election.
A majority vote for CUE would allow CUE to replace AFSCME as bargaining representative, and CUE would begin bargaining a new contract right after the election. CUE's election would not cause any sudden change in the terms and conditions of our employment. By law, terms and conditions of employment in the existing contract would remain in effect until CUE bargains a new contract. Also, California labor laws make it illegal for the University to change working conditions covered by the present contract as reprisal for the election of a better union.
But if "No Representation" wins a majority vote, the current contract would become null and void, no one would be allowed to bargain a new one, and UC could make any changes it wants, at any time, to our working conditions. This is one of many reasons why it would be a giant step backward for clericals to vote for "No Representation."
We know from our experience with AFSCME that having a union with a large national treasury and national connections doesn't help us here if these assets are not used effectively at UC. CUE's assets are very different: all of us in CUE work at UC, we know what our issues are, and we care about them more than someone from outside. In CUE, all our dues will be dedicated to building an effective and responsive union for UC clericals.
CUE needs people's support in order to win the election and bargain a better contract than the one we have now. Support can take many forms - ideas, criticism, discussion, time, energy, and dues money. To participate in the election campaign, to mail information to over 18,000 clericals, to bargain a contract -- this all costs money, and we pay for it with member dues. If CUE wins the election, membership will be voluntary, but in order to build a better, more effective union, thousands of us need to join.
We want every clerical worker to be able to afford to join. That's why we have developed a flexible dues structure in which each person can set his or her own dues rate, at a dollar per month or more. Many of our members are paying $15 per month (for full-time) or $7.50 (for part-time). Many pay less, and many pay more. All are members in good standing. All view our dues as an excellent investment in our future.
We believe we are making labor history with our effort, so far successful, to replace AFSCME by a truly member-run union of UC clericals. We hope you will help us make this effort succeed by joining and voting for CUE.
Clericals' Discrimination Complaint Gets National Attention
Readers of the CUE NEWS are urged to check CUE's web page to read the recent U.S. News and World Report story about secret syphilis testing of African-American employees at UC's Lawrence Berkeley National Lab - and CUE's response to that situation. Not until CUE member Marya Norman-Bloodsaw saw her personnel file, recognized the syphilis testing code written on it, and alerted several co-workers to examine their files, was the situation uncovered.
In a statement congratulating the involved employees for bringing national attention to the testing program, CUE's steering committee stated that "discrimination is much more common at UC than outsiders understand, although the instances are generally less dramatic than those exposed at UC's Berkeley Lab....Chief among our goals is to constructively fight for a workplace free of discrimination."
Good news -- there is still time to enter CUE's "Watch The Boss" contest and win a stupendous prize! UC clericals are invited to identify misstatements and biases in UC's "neutral" literature about the upcoming union election. Four movie tickets to the theatre of your choice if you find the most before November 3!
So far, UC's pitch has been directed largely at supervisors, who have been encouraged to believe it is their job to discourage discussion in their units about the election. Fortunately, most supervisors seem to feel they already have enough to do, without having to monitor the content of staff conversations and try to abridge basic free speech rights in their offices - so normal life continues, with clericals from Davis to San Diego discussing among themselves the importance of voting for a strong and effective union to work for fair pay and working conditions.
Here's our special back-to-school offer: you will get double credit, yes, double credit, for any of the following five ideas you find being pushed by your campus Human Resources Office:
- A union can't make any guarantees - you should trust UC instead.
- We are one big happy family at UC and unions just get in the way.
- "No representation" means "self representation".
- Staff always has management's ear, and management is listening carefully.
- YOU don't need a union; WE need to stay flexible.
INCENTIVE AWARDS: Can They Ever Be Fair?
One of the features of UC's HRMI (Human Resources Management Initiatives) is the "incentive award," a program of cash awards that has met with protests from UC clericals almost everywhere. The awards are funded by money that was allocated by the state legislature and by contract funding sources for general, base-building salary increases. Having received this money for general increases, UC then redirected the money to fund incentive awards, which do not increase basic salary levels or retirement pensions. For those employees (approximately half of the work force) who are at the top step of their pay range and who depend on general pay adjustments for any pay raises, the incentive award program is particularly burdensome.
There is little or no consistency between campuses, or even departments, in the selection processes for these awards. While some units have developed methods that are as fair as they can be under the circumstances, in many units, secrecy surrounds the selection process. Favoritism has been cited by many as a main factor in the selection of those to receive awards.
The arbitrariness of the awards was underscored when a Berkeley library "team" was selected for the award, but at the last minute all the team members who were casual employees (some of whom had been employed longer than their colleagues with career status) were cut from the list of award winners, a development that caused one career staff member to refuse her share of the award in protest.
UCLA CUE member's report that on their campus, one Management Services Officer selected herself for the entire amount that had been allotted to her department. When confronted about this, she angrily defended her action, claiming that she "deserved every penny of it."
Berkeley campus clerical Kate Capps described the effects of the award program in her unit: "I was part of a group of people given the award, and I was certainly happy to be able to take my kids on a trip with the money, but here at work, it was one of the worst experiences I've had. We couldn't really celebrate when deserving co-workers weren't awarded or even considered in some cases. Some people, who had made wonderful contributions to the unit's work, were hurt and angry when their work was not acknowledged. In the end, it was demoralizing for all of us. The fact that the money came from the cost of living increase that should have gone to everyone -- this made it especially hard to take".
San Diego clerical Jennifer Roth points out that members of one of the award committees on her campus gave themselves awards of about $3000. Roth describes the incentive awards as "one of the most flagrant abuses of state funds that has affected all of us."
Like other aspects of the new HRMI program, incentive awards are divisive. "They allow unfair bosses to toy with the incomes of workers under their supervision in a way that is inexcusable. I know that there are many good supervisors in the system, but there are also a lot of bad ones, and these people should not be handed this new tool for punishment and reward," said Irvine CUE chair Linda Salas. CUE applauds department heads and committees that have made the effort to distribute the awards in as fair a manner as possible, but CUE opposes the inherent unfairness of the program.
Go to Table of Contents
THE MEMBERS RUN THE UNION: CUE Supports Domestic Partner Benefits
Who makes decisions for UC? A supervisor, a department head, a dean, a chancellor. And ultimately, the Regents, 17 of whom are appointed and whose appointments do not depend on having any understanding of higher education or any accountability to the people of California, make some decisions.
Who makes decision for CUE? The members. This summer, CUE members voted to adopt the position that UC should extend health care and other benefits to non-married domestic partners, regardless of gender.
What began as a lively discussion among members of CUE's steering committee (which has representatives from every UC campus) turned into a full membership vote. Members from Berkeley and San Diego prepared position papers, arguing the pros and cons of the proposed position, and these arguments were sent to all CUE members.
The vote was timed to allow CUE to have a representative speak at the Regents' July 17 meeting in San Francisco, where the Regents discussed the idea of extending health care benefits to partners in non-married staff, faculty, and student couples.
Janice Kimball, a Library Assistant on the Berkeley campus, spoke for CUE. She was one of several union speakers to argue for extension of benefits. Other speakers included several faculty members who pointed out that many distinguished universities that compete with UC for faculty already offer domestic partner benefits. As of this date, the Regents have not taken a position.
The position adopted by CUE members notes that "failure to extend benefits to domestic partners (heterosexual, gay, lesbian, transgender and others) and their dependents puts UC in the position of violating its own stated policy of nondiscrimination based on sexual orientation or marital status."
Go to Table of Contents
UPS Union Makes Gains For Part-Time Workers
Congratulations to the 185,000 UPS Teamsters who stood up for themselves -- scoring important gains for themselves and their co-workers, especially in the areas of wages and improving conditions for part-time workers. UPS's history of using part-time workers in ways that undercut the status of full-timers is a pattern that is too familiar to many of UC's employees. At UPS, hourly wages for part-timers are lower than those for full-timers, although they do the same work and hold these jobs for many years. In many UC departments limited-term casual appointments are strung together, one after another. In this way, UC avoids paying benefits or offering any job security to these employees, whose work is as essential to the university's operation as that of career employees. CUE is collecting information on the abuse at UC of casual workers. CUE's research shows that there are over 5,000 part-time employees in the clerical unit, constituting over 28% of UC's clerical work force. If you have information or observations about the use of casuals and part-time workers at UC, send them along to clericals@igc.org or P.O. Box 618, Berkeley CA 94701).
Who Said it Couldn't Be Done? NEW CONTRACT FOR UC TECHNICAL EMPLOYEES GIVES HOPE TO CLERICALS
Almost three years of UC-stalled negotiations recently bore fruit for UC's 4,000 technical employees when the university agreed to a contract with the University Professional and Technical Employees, an affiliate of Communication Workers of America (UPTE/CWA).
The contract includes the following groundbreaking items, but perhaps most important of all, the techs successfully maintained COLA's and step increases and resisted UC's merit-only pay program. The techs won salary increases that are fully retroactive to the beginning of the bargaining period.
Other gains include:
- The first health and safety language ever for techs.
- Twenty-four hours of paid job-related training leave for career techs each year - the first such leave for staff employees in the UC system.
- Improved grievance and arbitration rights.
- Provisions allowing techs a choice of comp time off or money as compensation for premium overtime.
- Severance pay provisions, which, while limited, are the first ever, negotiated for UC employees.
- Sick leave use for domestic partners (first at UC).
- Work rules must be "reasonable" and can be arbitrated.
- Management can't unreasonably cancel vacations, once scheduled; management must not unreasonably restrict vacation use.
- Reclassification: Improved procedure to apply for reclassifications.
And how many takebacks? None!
Not bad for a fledgling union characterized by UC during the tech election campaign as unable to "guarantee" salary increases or improve working conditions.
How did they do it? Hard work, perseverance, and the involvement of the growing UPTE membership.
What does this mean to the rest of us, to those tired of AFSCME's indifference and eager for positive improvements in our own working lives?
It means, "If they can do it, so can we!"
Workshops on Working: CUE'S WORKSHOP SERIES EXTENDS TO FALL
CUE activists have been traveling up and down the state from Davis to San Diego, giving workshops on all the UC campuses. So far, workshops have been offered on the following topics: "How to Get a Job Reclassification," "Dealing with a Difficult Supervisor," "Leaves of Absence and How They Work," "Difficult Working Relationships," and "HRMI: UC's Plans for Our Future." The Job Reclassification workshop, which is particularly popular, was organized by CUE activists who have themselves gone through the process or who have assisted others to do so.
"People's response to these workshops has been very positive," according to CUE president Elinor Levine, "partly because clericals are eager to get reliable information. Neither the University nor the union now in place gives out the kind of information that people need in order to make the most of their job situation, to protect themselves, or resolve problems at the workplace." The workshop series will continue past the summer, into the new academic year, with future sessions dealing with contract issues. Any UC clerical who wants to be added to CUE's mailing list and be notified of future workshop schedules should ask to be added by writing to: clericals@igc.org
Go to Table of Contents